1740-S2 AMH TAYL H4807.1
2SHB 1740 - H AMD 1040
By Representative Taylor
On page 4, line 2, after "(b)" insert "or (c)"
On page 4, line 37, after "(c)" insert "A proposed development may not be challenged consistent with (a) of this subsection as long as the development is consistent with an optional subarea plan addressing rural economic deterioration consistent with RCW 36.70A.080(2).
(d)"
Reletter the remaining subsection consecutively and correct any internal references accordingly.
On page 6, line 12, after "36.70A.500," insert "to cover costs associated with the adoption of a subarea plan addressing rural economic deterioration consistent with RCW 36.70A.080(2),"
On page 6, after line 16, insert the following:
"Sec. 3.  RCW 36.70A.080 and 2011 c 318 s 801 are each amended to read as follows:
(1) A comprehensive plan may include additional elements, items, or studies dealing with other subjects relating to the physical development within its jurisdiction, including, but not limited to:
(a) Conservation;
(b) Solar energy; and
(c) Recreation.
(2)(a) A comprehensive plan may include, where appropriate, subarea plans, each of which is consistent with the comprehensive plan.
(b)(i) Counties with a population of fewer than seventy-five thousand as of January 1, 2014, as determined by the office of financial management and published on April 1, 2017, that are planning under this chapter, and the cities within those counties, may identify policies, programs, and development opportunities to address the potential for economic deterioration and to seize economic development opportunities that may deviate from prescriptive interpretations of this chapter as part of a subarea plan addressing rural economic deterioration.
(ii) For the purposes of this section, economic deterioration is exemplified by, but not limited to, any combination of the following performance outcomes:
(A) Incomes that are at least ten thousand dollars less than the statewide median household income for the same year as established by the office of financial management;
(B) A decrease in the county's household median income during any year within the prior eight years;
(C) The inability of the jurisdiction to add new full-time jobs in sufficient quantities to provide for population increases;
(D) Decreases or stagnation of economic start-ups during multiple years within the prior eight years;
(E) Unemployment rates that are higher than the national and statewide averages over multiple years within the prior eight years; and
(F) Decreases or stagnation in the issuance of commercial building permits during multiple years.
(iii) In situations where the competing goals of this chapter would restrain economic development in the counties described in this subsection (2)(b), and the cities within those counties, that are experiencing economic deterioration, the growth management hearings board and courts shall afford deference to local development choices that make economic development a priority, consistent with the presumption of validity required under RCW 36.70A.320.
(3)(a) Cities that qualify as a receiving city may adopt a comprehensive plan element and associated development regulations that apply within receiving areas under chapter 39.108 RCW.
(b) For purposes of this subsection, the terms "receiving city" and "receiving area" have the same meanings as provided in RCW 39.108.010."
Correct the title.
EFFECT: Expands the areas within which development is eligible for exemption from appeals under the State Environmental Policy Act to include developments that are consistent with an optional subarea plan adopted by a city or county to address rural economic deterioration. Authorizes the Growth Management Planning and Environmental Review Fund to be used to cover costs associated with the adoption of a subarea plan addressing rural economic deterioration. Authorizes counties with a population of fewer than 75,000 as of January 1, 2014, and cities within those counties to identify policies, programs, and development opportunities as part of a subarea plan to address potential economic deterioration and to seize development opportunities that may deviate from prescriptive interpretations of the Growth Management Act (GMA). Provides examples of the economic performance outcomes that economic deterioration includes, and which thereby qualify an area to be the subject of a subarea plan adopted by certain GMA planning counties or cities. Directs courts and the Growth Management Hearings Board to afford deference, in situations where the GMA's competing goals would restrain economic development, to local economic development choices of counties with a population of fewer than 75,000 as of January 1, 2014, and cities in those counties, consistent with the GMA's existing presumption of validity of adopted comprehensive plans and development regulations.
--- END ---